Warning: This story contains sexualised content
The fiancée of a man accused of strangling two women has told a court of her own experience of being strangled for sexual pleasure, describing a sensation of euphoria.
The woman, whose name is suppressed, told a court about two years before meeting her fiancé in 2016 she and another man agreed he would strangle her to the point of unconsciousness, or close to it.
Earlier the court heard evidence that engaging in “breath play” until someone lost consciousness, wasn’t something the BDSM community did.
But, while giving evidence for the defence, she told the court it was something that was done. However, while she was into ‘breath play’ she didn’t do it very often as it was risky.
Referring to the time she had done it with the other man she described how he had placed his hands around her neck and how she felt pressure in her head and saw stars. She said she felt a lack of consciousness and a loss of control and recalled feelings of euphoria and a “happy, calm feeling”.
Her fiancé, who has name suppression, is accused of strangling two women to the point of unconsciousness and injuring with intent to injure.
He met those two other women on Tinder and all three had an interest in BDSM but he denied the incidents ever happened.
Police interview: Alleged incident ‘doesn’t ring any bells’
In his police interview played to a jury in the Wellington District Court on Monday, the man said what had started as a BDSM relationship with one of the complainants, had evolved into a friendship before the two became business partners.
Earlier, the court heard they had run a central city apartment in Wellington from which sex workers operated.
In the interview, he said while they had a close relationship, he was concerned about her, especially over lockdown, and explained why their relationship had ended.
“I sharply broke it off with her when I found out she’d been lying about some fundamental things and endangering some of our friends, continuing in the abusive relationship she was in, drinking too much. So, I broke it off and signed over my shares of the company with her", he said.
But until then he’d had a good relationship with the complainant, even flying with her and his fiancée to Australia to celebrate his birthday. He’d helped the woman through her divorce and custody matters, he said.
He explained that his dominant role in their relationship wasn’t just sexual stuff it was a lot of keeping life on track in conversations and a lot of other responsibilities as well.
“We did a huge range of things ... I’m trying to recall a time when we did any sort of breath play/strangulation, but I can’t recall any, he said.
“My whole goal is everyone has to have a positive experience; I don’t recall any time when safe words were used.”
“I feel with everything we did together we had a lot of conversations about consent and what we were and weren’t willing to do", he said, adding the woman’s allegations didn’t “make sense”.
In the interview, the officer described how the woman explained she had met the man at the door naked and given him a beer. She followed the man into the apartment on her hands and knees to the bathroom, where they discussed having sex in the shower.
The woman said during the shower the man turned the woman around so her back was facing him, he put his arm around her neck and squeezed until she passed out. She was unsure how long she was unconscious but when she awoke the man was unconcerned and staring at her.
The man said he didn’t recall that incident, but he was adamant that wasn’t how he would behave.
“I’d be very concerned if someone passed out ... I’d be very concerned, I’d be helping to get them out of the shower", he said in the interview.
“That is the opposite of what I’d do if someone passed out in front of me", he said referring to the claim he had stared at the woman and not helped her.
He said it was hard for him to say any more as the allegation, “didn’t ring any bells.”
The court heard only one complainant’s allegations were put to the man during that video interview, as police hadn’t completed their interviews with the second complainant.
The first complainant, while initially certain of the date the offence in the shower, was less certain after the man produced text messages showing the offending couldn’t have happened that day.
The court also heard the police didn’t ask for any messages between the two women to ascertain if they had colluded before making their allegations to the police, which the defence said they did.
The trial before Judge Bruce Davidson continues on Tuesday.
